It was resolved at the last telecon that *by the first f2f* we would
publish as first public working drafts (1stWD) roughly the following
three OWL 1.1 documents:
Structural Specification
Formal Semantics
RDF Mapping
Which, together, comprise the core specification of the language,
i.e., they are together sufficient to implement of parsers,
reasoners, editors, etc. and rigorous enough to support
interoperability.
I imagine we will transition *all* the OWL 1.1 specs to W3C space
fairly soon. That doesn't make them WDs. Generally, such versions are
called "Editor's drafts" and they are not intended to reflect *any*
general will of the WG.
Working Drafts *do not* signal that the WG endorses all aspects (or
*any* aspects) of those drafts, but merely that the WG thought they
were publication worthy.
I propose that we publish these three documents as first public WDs
in the next few weeks for the following reasons:
1) It meets the heartbeat requirement and establishes a good
publishing pace.
2) It provides a clear transition from the webont.org space to W3C
space.
People are *continually reviewing* the OWL 1.1 specs. For example,
see this thread:
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-dev/2007OctDec/
0074.html>
I want to encourage as much feedback as possible and to continue the
very open process that OWLED and OWL 1.1 have enjoyed thus far.
People should have a clear target for their ongoing review. I know
some WG members have qualms about various aspects of the current
drafts (e.g., like Jeremey expressed in the Telecon about the RDF
Mapping). So will *non-members*. On thing that focuses reviewer
attention is WD publication. While we, as a group, are getting up to
speed on the documents, we should be encouraging *other people* to do
so as well and to make their thoughts about the documents know to us.
This is why I object to the whole notion of first doing an "internal
review" as suggested by Vipul during the telecon. We want lots of
feedback *now*, before we start mucking with the documents as a
group. We want that feedback to be ongoing. And, as I said, the
documents are already public, with a year and a half's worth of
effort trying to get people to look at them :)
Remember, that we have significant existing implementations (TopBraid
Composer, Protege4, OWLSight, Pellet, FaCT++, etc.) which use these
documents. So saying very clearly, "HEY, we're starting work on these
documents! Pay attention!", (which is what the FPWD publishing event
says very clearly) is wise.
Cheers,
Bijan.